immigrants in norway, sweden and denmark - unece · scandinavian comparative statistics on...

1

Scandinavian comparative statistics on integration

Immigrants in Norway, Sweden and Denmark

Silje Vatne Pettersen and Lars Østby, Statistics Norway

There are very few good analyses that compare immigration and integration in different

countries. Also in Scandinavia, establishing data that is of sufficiently good quality for

comparisons is not without its problems. Sweden has by far the most immigrants, particularly

refugees, both in absolute terms and in relation to the size of the population. Labour

immigration from the EU has been relatively greater in Norway than in Sweden and Denmark.

The integration of immigrants is often linked to differences in the extent and composition of the

immigration.

Immigration on a scale experienced in the Scandinavian countries over the last 40 years has never

been seen before (see Figure 1). Some fundamental similarities have been observed in the three

countries' migration patterns, and the countries also have strong historical and cultural similarities.

Nevertheless, there are important disparities in the nature and scope of immigration that are well worth

studying.

The blessings of comparisons…

With so many political and social similarities between the Scandinavian countries, we are as close to

an experimental situation as is possible in social sciences. The purpose of comparative analyses of

integration of immigrants in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, is to identify similarities and differences

in the behaviour and living conditions of immigrants in the three countries. By doing so, we can form

a basis for evaluating the effect of somewhat differing immigration and integration policies in the

three countries.

Such comparative analyses are entirely dependent on the data used being comparable. This requires

the data to be harmonised (i.e. the definitions that are used must be the same) and to be collected in the

same categories in the three countries. This is the only way to achieve proper comparisons.

Background

The article is based on the efforts to harmonise indicators of immigrant integration in Norway, Sweden

and Denmark. This work was carried out by national statistical agencies and integration authorities

prior to the Nordic government officials meeting on integration in autumn 2012. The Directorate of

Integration and Diversity (IMDi) has funded the Norwegian contribution.

This article was first published in Norwegian, in Statistics Norway’s journal Samfunnsspeilet.

Pettersen, Silje Vatne og Lars Østby (2013): Skandinavisk komparativ statistikk om integrering

Innvandrere i Norge, Sverige og Danmark. Samfunnsspeilet 5/2013. Statistisk sentralbyrå.

Data source

This article uses register data from Norway, Sweden and Denmark on the population’s composition,

education and labour participation. The data was made available by Statistics Denmark, Statistics

Norway and Statistics Sweden.

http://www.ssb.no/befolkning/artikler-og-publikasjoner/innvandrere-i-norge-sverige-og-danmark

http://www.ssb.no/befolkning/artikler-og-publikasjoner/innvandrere-i-norge-sverige-og-danmark

2

Composition effects

Immigrants' demographic and migration-specific composition in the three countries can have an effect

on for instance national employment rates. This is often referred to as composition effects. A country

with a large number of newly arrived refugees may have a lower employment rate than a country with

many migrant workers. The disparity at national level can thus be partly due to the share of refugees,

but also differing periods of residence, country of origin, gender distribution, family composition, and

so on. It is therefore important to compare groups that are as similar as possible. The disparities that

remain after such harmonisation may, to some extent, be explained by differences in integration

policies, but there are of course other explanations that can play a part.

Definitions

Immigrant: a person who is born outside the country to two foreign-born parents, and who at some

point has immigrated to Norway or Denmark (for Sweden, see foreign-born).

Descendant of immigrants: a person born in Norway, Sweden or Denmark to two immigrant parents

(foreign-born parents in Sweden).

Country of origin: used for these purposes synonymously with an immigrant’s country of birth.

Scandinavia: made up of the countries Denmark, Norway and Sweden.

Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden as well as associated territories;

the Åland Islands, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, Svalbard and Jan Mayen.

Foreign-born: defined for these purposes as a person living in Sweden who was not born in Sweden.

The term encompasses more than “immigrants” since it also applies to persons whose parents were

born in Sweden.

…and the scourge of harmonisation

Harmonising data across borders is not without its problems. The countries' statistics aim to protect

important national interests. Each country’s priorities may differ, and harmonisation could reduce the

details that are perceived by the individual countries to be the most important, but which are not

available in the other countries' statistics.

Unfortunately, we have not been able to establish a uniform definition of “immigrant” for the three

countries. Sweden uses the term “foreign-born” in its official statistics, while Norway and Denmark

also look at the country of birth of the parents of a person born abroad (see text boxes with definitions

and data sources). In Norway, immigrants made up 89 per cent of all persons born abroad as per 1

January 2012. There is reason to believe that the percentage is similar in Sweden. We perceive the

Norwegian and Danish definition to be best suited for comparisons of immigrants' participation in

education and employment.

The comparative analysis of participation in education and employment for individual countries of

origin is only given for Norway and Denmark, since no corresponding figures were made available for

Sweden. This is unfortunate since important disparities between immigrants from individual countries

in Africa and Asia are lost when aggregated to a regional level.

It is not yet possible to harmonise some relevant variables between the Scandinavian countries. This is

particularly the case for grounds for immigration and highest achieved level of education. This is

because we lack information on these factors in one or more of the Scandinavian countries, and

because the definitions and registration schemes differ quite considerably. It is in many ways

unfortunate, especially since reason for immigration could help explain some of the disparities

between individual countries’ immigrants that we are unable to examine in this analysis due to the lack

of information from Sweden.

3

Gradual opening of country borders…

Immigration to Scandinavia must be viewed in light of the gradual opening of country borders,

initially within the Nordic countries and then the EU, in addition to the national policies on labour

migration, refugees and family reunification from countries outside the EU. There are many

similarities between the Scandinavian countries in these areas, but also differences.

Figure 1. Immigration to Norway, Sweden and Denmark. 1968-2011. Absolute numbers

Source: Population statistics: Statistics Norway, Statistics Sweden, Statistics Denmark

Since 1954, we have had a common Nordic labour market (Fischer and Straubhaar 1996), and since

1994, the entire Nordic region has been part of the open European labour market within the EU/EEA

area. This means that for more than 50 years citizens from the Nordic countries have been able to

freely live and work in another Nordic country, and that this right has largely been extended to all

EU/EEA citizens (Norwegian Directorate of Immigration 2013). In addition, the Nordic countries have

recruited workers from non-European countries, such as Pakistan and Turkey. For the migration

pattern in the first half of the 1900s, see Østby 2005.

Employment was the main reason for immigration until the start of the 1970s. Sweden’s industry

remained intact after World War II, and was ready to produce for a Europe that was being rebuilt and

was in great need of labour - which was partly covered by south Europeans. Towards the end of the

1960s, immigration was dominated by Finns who had lost their jobs. Labour migration to all three

countries stopped when the oil crisis in 1973 led to restrictions on immigration from countries outside

the Nordic region. Then followed a long period of family reunification for migrant workers or new

immigrants who were fleeing from war or persecution (from countries including Chile, Vietnam, Iran,

former Yugoslavia, Iraq and Somalia). Since the eastward expansion of the EU in 2004, labour

migration, particularly from Poland and the Baltic states, has characterised the immigration situation

in the Scandinavian countries, in addition to continued family immigration and immigration due to

flight.

Figure 1 illustrates that, for a long period of time stretching right up to the turn of the century,

Denmark had almost as many immigrants as Sweden. Since 2000, immigration to Denmark has been

fairly stable, while Norway and Sweden’s immigration figures have doubled. Sweden had a

particularly high number of immigrants until 1970 (from Finland), and a large influx of refugees in the

early 1990s and from 2005. The increase in immigration to Norway after 2005 is due to the large

numbers immigrating for work, particularly since the expansion of the EU in 2004.

0

20 000

40 000

60 000

80 000

100 000

120 000

19

68

19

70

19

72

19

74

19

76

19

78

19

80

19

82

19

84

19

86

19

88

19

90

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

Sweden

Norway

Denmark

4

Sweden has most immigrants

Despite similarities in the general immigration picture, there are major disparities between the

Scandinavian countries in terms of immigrant numbers. Sweden currently has about three times as

many immigrants as Norway and Denmark (1.43 versus 0.55 and 0.44 million). The figure for Sweden

relates to foreign-born (see text box for definitions).

Sweden also has the highest percentage of foreign-born in Scandinavia, with 15 per cent of the

population at the start of 2012, compared with 10 per cent on average for the EU; a figure provided by

the European statistics agency Eurostat (2013). It is also in Sweden we find the highest share of

descendants of immigrants, with 5 per cent. Then follows Norway with 11 per cent immigrants and 2

per cent descendants of immigrants (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Population composition in Norway, Sweden1 and Denmark. 1 January 2012. Per cent

1 Foreign-born in Sweden.


Half of immigrants are from Asia, Africa or Latin America

About half of all immigrants in Scandinavia are from countries in Asia, Africa or Latin America (see

Figure 3), with a slightly higher proportion in Norway than Denmark and Sweden. This mainly relates

to early migrant workers followed by refugees, as well as the families of these two groups.

The next largest group of immigrants are from EU countries outside the Nordic region, and this is

currently dominated by labour immigrants from Eastern Europe. Immigrants from the Nordic

countries make up the third largest group in Norway and Sweden.

A large number of Swedes are also in Norway to work, and in Sweden, Finnish immigrants make up

the largest immigrant group due to historical reasons. From the rest of Europe, large numbers

immigrated during the unrest in the Balkans in the 1990s, while immigrants from North America,

Australia and New Zealand make up the smallest groups.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Denmark Sweden Norway

Per cent

Immigrants

Descendants ofimmigrants

Rest of the population

5

Figure 3. Immigrants1, by country of birth (region). Norway, Sweden and Denmark. 1 January

2012. Per cent



Over 40 per cent of the immigrants have lived in Scandinavia for more than 15 years (see Figure 4). In

Norway, there are also many new arrivals; twice the share in Denmark and Sweden. The share of

descendants of immigrants as a percentage of those with an immigrant background is far lower in

Norway than in the other two countries. This is because a large percentage of immigrants in Norway

have only been in the country for a short period of time and have not had time to have children.

Figure 4. Immigrants1 by length of residence in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. 1 January 2012.

Per cent

1Foreign-born in Sweden.


0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

80 %

90 %

100 %


Asia w/Turkey, Africa,South and CentralAmerica

Noth America, Australia,New Zealand

Rest of Europe

EU27/EEA

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

40 %

45 %

50 %


0-3 years

4-7 years

8-15 years

More than 15 years

6

The general picture is thus relatively similar for the Scandinavian countries. However, the variations

are greater when we examine immigrants from each individual country of origin (see Tables 1 and 2).

For example, relatively large numbers of labour immigrants and family immigrants came from

Pakistan and Turkey to Norway and Denmark in the 1970s, although there were far fewer than the

European migrant workers that came from the EU after 2004. Immigrants from Pakistan and Turkey

are established groups with a long period of residence who have gradually increasing numbers of

grown up children who have lived all or most of their life in Scandinavia. In Sweden, however, most

Pakistanis are relatively new to the country, and many of them are male students, while immigrants

from Turkey are more likely to be political or religious refugees than is the case in Norway and

Denmark.

Table 1. Immigrants1 by country of origin. Norway, Sweden and Denmark. 1 January 2012.

Absolute numbers


Turkey 32 379 43 909 10 696

Poland 28 043 72 865 67 339

Iraq 21 197 125 499 21 784

Somalia 9 951 40 165 20 976

Bosnia-Herzegovina 17 580 56 290 13 146

Pakistan 12 079 10 539 17 893

Vietnam 9 024 15 175 13 222



Table 2. Descendants of immigrants, by parents’ country of birth. Norway, Sweden and

Denmark. 1 January 2012. Absolute numbers


Turkey 28 011 28 450 6 046

Poland 3 677 15 598 4 764

Iraq 8 687 37 509 7 151

Somalia 7 161 13 800 8 419

Bosnia-Herzegovina 4 765 16 030 3 192

Pakistan 9 563 3 117 14 844

Vietnam 5 283 6 533 7 649


Liberal Swedes take in large numbers of refugees

Sweden is distinguished by having a more liberal refugee policy than the other Nordic countries.

Sweden has, for example, taken in many more refugees from Iraq and the former Yugoslavia than

Denmark and Norway, also in relation to population size. In Sweden, refugees from Iraq make up 1.3

per cent of the population, while the corresponding figure in Norway and Denmark is 0.4 per cent.

Another example of disparities in the composition of immigration is the immigration from Poland,

which is substantial in all of the Scandinavian countries. While immigrants in Norway are dominated

by relatively new Polish workers - currently the largest immigrant group in Norway – there are already

a great deal of Polish political refugees in Sweden and Denmark who have been living in the country

for a long time and who are often well established in the community. These disparities in length of

stay and reason for immigration in the Scandinavian countries are important to take into account when

7

analysing the integration and participation in society. There are important differences by country of

origin, and between groups from the same country.

Integration policies differ

In general, it can be said that Sweden has the most liberal immigration and integration policy in

Scandinavia, and that Denmark has a more stringent policy in this area than the other two countries.

Norway falls somewhere in between. (For a detailed discussion on integration policies in the Nordic

countries, see Brochmann and Hagelund 2012 and 2005, and Bevelander et al 2013). In Norway, the

economy has been particularly favourable in recent years. We should therefore expect immigrants to

have better access to the labour market in Norway than in the other two countries.

Below we examine immigrants' participation in education and employment in Norway, Denmark and

Sweden, and how they fare compared with descendants of immigrants and the rest of the population.

We start with drop-out rates at upper secondary school. We then discuss participation in education

among the 20-24 year-olds, and employment among those aged 25 to 64. Finally, we examine

immigrants who are neither studying nor working.

Although we have some knowledge of the effect of differing integration policies at a national level, we

do not know whether the disparities we see in Scandinavia are due to different policies or “different

immigrants”. A great deal of research still needs to be done in this area, but the descriptions we

present here will act as a good starting point for such analyses.

High drop-out rate in upper secondary schools throughout

Scandinavia

All of the Scandinavian countries have a much higher percentage of boys than girls who do not

complete upper secondary school within five years (see Figure 5). The drop-out percentage is much

higher among immigrants than in the "rest of the population", while the share for descendants of

immigrants lies somewhere in between. There are two exceptions in particular to this general pattern.

The drop-out rate is lower in Sweden than in the other Scandinavian countries, especially among boys.

Among female descendants of immigrants, the share is lowest in Norway, and is on a par with the rest

of the population.

Swedish authorities and Statistics Sweden are reluctant to publish data on foreign-born persons’

participation in employment and education broken down by country of origin; the preferred method is

to give figures by region. Country of origin figures are, therefore, only available for Denmark and

Norway in this comparative analysis. Researchers do, however, have access to this Swedish data for

analysis purposes.

Bevelander et al (2013) estimated their own figures for Sweden, and disparities emerged that largely

correspond to the picture we present here for Denmark and Norway. For example, the drop-out rate

from upper secondary school among those from Somalia is particularly high in Denmark and Norway

(see Figure 6). These are interesting similarities. However, among those with a background from

Turkey and Iraq, the drop-out rate is much higher in Norway than in Denmark. Why the rate is so high

for the groups from Turkey and Iraq is not clear, but the pattern in Norway corresponds with several of

the findings in a previous study of living conditions among immigrants (Blom and Henriksen 2008,

and Henriksen 2010).

8

Figure 5. Share who did not complete upper secondary school within five years, by immigration

background. Norway, Sweden1 and Denmark. 2011. Per cent

Girls Boys


Source: Education statistics: Statistics Norway, Statistics Sweden, Statistics Denmark

Figure 6. Share of immigrants who did not complete upper secondary school after five years, by

country of birth. Norway and Denmark. 2011. Per cent

Source: Education statistics: Statistics Norway, Statistics Denmark

Higher education more common in Denmark and Norway

Among those who complete upper secondary school, there is a relatively wide variation between the

Scandinavian countries in relation to whether a person continues on to higher education (see Figure 7).

The share participating in higher education in Norway and Denmark is higher than in Sweden, and this

is particularly the case for descendants of immigrants and “the rest of the population.” Thus, the

picture is the opposite of what we saw for the upper secondary school drop-out rate.

In Denmark, there is little disparity between immigrants and other groups. There is therefore a far

greater share participating in higher education in Denmark than on average in Sweden. In Norway,

however, there are major disparities between the groups, with the higher education rate for

descendants of immigrants being almost double that of the share for immigrants.

One important similarity between the Scandinavian countries, however, is that descendants of

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %


0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %


Immigrants


Rest of thepopulation

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

Turkey Iraq Somalia Bosnia-H.

Denmark

Norway

9

immigrants participate in higher education to a greater extent than the other groups, and as we have

already observed, this is particularly the case in Norway. Denmark has relatively few migrant workers

and few new arrivals, which may partly explain why the share in higher education is greater there.

Figure 7. Share in higher education, aged 20-24 years, minimum two-year length of residence, by

immigration background. Norway, Sweden1 and Denmark. 2011/2012. Per cent

1Foreign-born for Sweden.

Source: Education statistics: Statistics Norway, Statistics Sweden, Statistics Denmark

Immigrants from Bosnia-Herzegovina, Pakistan and Vietnam, i.e. groups that on average have been in

Scandinavia for a relatively long time, are more likely to participate in higher education than

immigrants from Turkey, Poland, Iraq and Somalia (see Figure 8, Immigrants).

Figure 8. Share in higher education, aged 20-24 years, minimum two-year length of residence, by

country background. Norway and Denmark. 2011-2012

Immigrants Descendants of immigrants

Source: Education statistics: Statistics Norway, Statistics Denmark

The fact that participation is lower among newly arrived refugees or migrant workers is not surprising,

but it is interesting that it is so much higher in Denmark than in Norway. This may be due to a more

stringent immigration policy in Denmark, and that some refugees who did not “meet the criteria” may

have left the country (Bevelander et al 2013). Another factor that might also play a role in Denmark, is

the 24 year age limit and strict economic requirements for family immigration. Some refugees below

the age of 24 prepare themselves for meeting these requirements by getting qualified for well paid

work when they reach the age when they can get the family into the country.

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

40 %

45 %


Immigrants


Rest of the population

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

Denmark

Norway

10

The large disparity in the share of Poles in higher education in Denmark and Norway is most likely

due to the large influx of young Polish men coming to Norway to work, and because the share of

students is therefore relatively small here. It is also worth noting that immigrants from Turkey, which

have generally been in the country for a long time, participate in education to a much lesser extent

than those from Pakistan, and this applies to both immigrants and descendants of immigrants.

Employment increases with length of stay in Sweden

In a period with a thriving economy and a need for labour, many immigrants have come to Norway to

work. The employment rate for new arrivals is therefore higher in Norway than in Denmark and

Sweden (see Figure 9). While the employment rate stagnates after four to seven years of residence and

then drops slightly in Norway and Denmark, it rises sharply with length of residence in Sweden. Those

who have lived in Sweden or Norway for more than 15 years participate in the labour market to the

same extent. The pattern is the same for immigrant women and men from Asia, Africa and Latin

America in Norway and Sweden.

Table 3. Share in employment aged 25-64 years. Norway, Sweden and Denmark. 2011. Per cent


Entire population 74.4 78.5 79.9

Immigrants1 54.6 57.0 67.9

Of this

Nordic region 63.9 65.4 82.6

EU/EEA 65.4 63.3 78.6

Africa, Asia incl. Turkey, South and Central America 48.3 51.1 56.9

Descendants of immigrants 66.9 78.8 76.2


Source: Labour market statistics: Statistics Norway, Statistics Sweden, Statistics Denmark

There is a significant disparity between the Scandinavian countries. According to MIPEX (Migrant

Integration Policy Index III); an index that compares integration policies in 24 European countries

(British Council 2011), Sweden has the best policy for the inclusion of immigrants in the labour

market, despite its lower employment rate (Table 3), particularly in the initial years after immigration

(see Figure 9).

Figure 9. Share of immigrants in employment1, aged 25-64 years, by length of residence.

Norway, Sweden and Denmark. 2011. Per cent



0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

80 %

0-3 years 4-7 years 8-15 years More than15 years

Denmark

Sweden

Norway

11

Fewer school drop-outs in Norway

We have already observed that many immigrants, especially boys, do not complete upper secondary

school in Scandinavia. Some go back to studying later, while others go out to work. However, there

are those who fall by the wayside. In Scandinavia, Norway has the lowest share of persons who are

neither in work or in education regardless of immigration background in the age group 18-24 years

(see Figure 1 10). This is partly because of the thriving economy and the high employment in Norway

in recent years. In Sweden, a slightly higher share is outside the labour force and education, but

relative to the rest of the population, immigrants were faring better in Sweden than in the other

Scandinavian countries in 2010.

Figure 10. Persons who are neither in employment nor education, by immigrant background.

18-24 years. Norway, Sweden1 and Denmark. 4th quarter 2010. Per cent



Denmark has the highest share of immigrants who are outside the labour force and education. This

particularly applies to women (see also Olsen 2012). This disparity between Norway and Denmark

applies to all countries of origin in this analysis, with the exception of Somalia (see Figure 11). Girls

from Somalia are more likely to be outside the labour force and education in Norway than in

Denmark. This may be related to the considerable emigration of Somalis from Denmark (Bevelander

et al 2013).

Figure 11. Immigrants who are neither in employment nor education, by country of birth. 18-24

years. Norway and Denmark. 4th quarter 2010. Per cent

Source: Labour market statistics: Statistics Norway, Statistics Denmark

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %


Immigrants


Rest of thepopulation

0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 %

Turkey

Poland

Iraq

Somalia

Bosnia-H.

Pakistan

Vietnam

Norway

Denmark

12

What now?

The natural next step in this analysis will be to relate the disparities in immigration and integration to

the individual countries' policies. We have not been able to do this here. Nevertheless, we can see the

differing immigration scales and compositions in the countries partly as a result of the policy followed.

Denmark has had relatively limited immigration and a restrictive immigration policy since the

beginning of the new millennium. Sweden has a high level of immigration, which is particularly due to

them taking in large numbers who are in need of protection. Norway's high immigration level is

particularly linked to the low unemployment, high wages, the need for labour in some industries in

Norway and problems in the labour market in many other countries.

Participation in education and the labour market differs for immigrants in the three countries, even

when we take into account that the composition of the immigrant population is different. We have

seen that these disparities are extensive, perhaps more so than we would have expected based on the

significant similarities found in the countries’ culture and history. It may be interesting to analyse how

disparities in immigrants' living conditions can develop within the framework of the Nordic welfare

model.

References

Bevelander, P., R. Bilde, I. Dahlstedt, M. Eskelund, L.M. Hansen, M. Macura, K.G. Pedersen and L. Østby (2013):

Scandinavia’s Population Groups Originating from Developing Countries: Change and Integration, Current Themes in

IMER Research no. 14, Malmø University.

British Council (2011): MIPEX III. Migrant Integration Policy Index III. (http://www.mipex.eu/)

Blom, S. and K. Henriksen (red.) (2008): Levekår blant innvandrere i Norge 2005/2006, Rapporter 2008/5, Statistics

Norway. (http://www.ssb.no/sosiale-forhold-og-kriminalitet/artikler-og-publikasjoner/levekaar-blant-innvandrere-i-norge-

2005-2006?fane=om)

Brochmann, G. and A. Hagelund (2012): Immigration Policy and the Welfare State 1945–2010, Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Brochmann, G. and A. Hagelund (2005): Innvandringens velferdspolitiske konsekvenser. Nordisk kunnskapsstatus,

TemaNord 2005:506, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.

Eurostat (2013): (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/population/data/main_tables) Downloaded 1 November

2013.

Fischer, P and T. Straubhaar (1996): Migration and Economic Integration in the Nordic Common Labour Market. Nord

1996:2, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.

Henriksen, K. (2010): Levekår og kjønnsforskjeller blant innvandrere fra ti land, Rapporter 2010/6, Statistics Norway.

(http://www.ssb.no/sosiale-forhold-og-kriminalitet/artikler-og-publikasjoner/levekaar-og-kjonnsforskjeller-blant-

innvandrere-fra-ti-land)

Olsen, Bjørn (2012): Unge med innvandrerbakgrunn i Skandinavia. Hvor mange er i arbeid eller utdanning? Rapporter

2012/32, Statistics Norway. (http://www.ssb.no/arbeid-og-lonn/artikler-og-publikasjoner/unge-med-innvandrerbakgrunn-i-

skandinavia?fane=om)

Norwegian Directorate of Immigration (2013): Oppholdsrett i Norge for EU/EØS/EFTA-borgere, Downloaded 1 October

2013. (www.udi.no/Sentrale-tema/Arbeid-og-opphold/Arbeid-og-opphold-EU-EOS-EFTA-borgere/)

Østby, L. (2005): «Befolkningsutvikling 1905-2005: Flest innvandrere i Sverige, flest barn i Norge», in Statistiske analyser

69, Hundre års ensomhet? Norge og Sverige 1905-2005, pages 18-33., Statistics Norway. (http://www.ssb.no/sosiale-forhold-

og-kriminalitet/artikler-og-publikasjoner/hundre-aars-ensomhet?fane=om)

immigrants in norway, sweden and denmark - unece · scandinavian comparative statistics on...

Documents